Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 28 Jun 2017 (Wednesday) 23:15
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6d2 is here.

 
rantercsr
Goldmember
Avatar
2,847 posts
Gallery: 34 photos
Likes: 5242
Joined Mar 2014
     
Jul 09, 2017 17:48 as a reply to  @ post 18398068 |  #811

speaking of not a chance in hell...

have you heard the one about Monsanto suing farmers for having seeds with there patented strain in them even though they never bought seeds from them?

so it turns out wind carrys pollen or something like that ,, and if your neighbor farmer bought seeds from Monsanto it will get into your plants and your next harvests seeds when tested will show the Monsanto trace..
and so they go sued for using a strain of see they didn't legally purchase..

well ,, the famrmers settled because Monsanto threw so much money at the case ,, because they got that kind of money.. and the mom and pop farmer just coulndt keep up


I got a couple of Cameras and lenses ...Canon, Sony, Fuji, Pansonic, pentax
My portraits IG (external link)My everything else IG (external link)
MY flickr (external link)
My latest YT video -->https://youtu.be/YzJ1o​eiHm7Y (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
35,398 posts
Gallery: 98 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4905
Joined May 2002
Location: Cannelton
     
Jul 09, 2017 17:56 as a reply to  @ post 18398104 |  #812

Magic lantern isn't a company, nor make any money, it is an open community effort. I can write code and submit it. There isn't an entity to sue, and Canon could care less if somebody bricks their camera with ML. All Canon cares about is somebody uncovering capabilities Canon hid in the hardware and firmware. If Canon wants to protect against this, there are design and programming techniques they could employ to stop that. No different with people modding game consoles with special code, MS just made sure they could never connect to Live.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,734 posts
Likes: 2006
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jul 09, 2017 17:57 |  #813

I thought Lexmark lost their case. The SCotUS sided with the end user.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,614 posts
Likes: 489
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Post edited over 1 year ago by davesrose.
     
Jul 09, 2017 18:17 as a reply to  @ TeamSpeed's post |  #814

Magic Lantern is still a collective of developers. This is America: a country that gives anyone the right to sue. And a behemoth like Canon can have the capitol to destroy or buy out small groups. Look at the list of law suites IBM brought upon Microsoft, even though they gave them rights to their PC OS. If you look at ML's about page, they do say they aren't going to publish Canon's code or copyrighted material. If there were enough people bricking their camera, or Canon saw ML as a threat or great addition...they would either sue or buy out ML.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,255 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2049
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
Post edited over 1 year ago by Left Handed Brisket.
     
Jul 09, 2017 18:20 |  #815

rantercsr wrote in post #18398142 (external link)
speaking of not a chance in hell...

have you heard the one about Monsanto suing farmers for having seeds with there patented strain in them even though they never bought seeds from them?

so it turns out wind carrys pollen or something like that ,, and if your neighbor farmer bought seeds from Monsanto it will get into your plants and your next harvests seeds when tested will show the Monsanto trace..
and so they go sued for using a strain of see they didn't legally purchase..

well ,, the famrmers settled because Monsanto threw so much money at the case ,, because they got that kind of money.. and the mom and pop farmer just coulndt keep up

Interestingly, the mention of GM seed, IP, and patents, was part of the original post that set this discussion off on its merry way.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18398151 (external link)
Magic lantern isn't a company, nor make any money, it is an open community effort. I can write code and submit it. There isn't an entity to sue, and Canon could care less if somebody bricks their camera with ML. All Canon cares about is somebody uncovering capabilities Canon hid in the hardware and firmware. If Canon wants to protect against this, there are design and programming techniques they could employ to stop that. No different with people modding game consoles with special code, MS just made sure they could never connect to Live.

Bolded is 100 percent wrong. ML is distributed and developed under the GPL. The history of for profit companies suing open source, non-commercial developers is long.

gjl711 wrote in post #18398153 (external link)
I thought Lexmark lost their case. The SCotUS sided with the end user.

They did.

Which is part of what makes it a a great example of a large company trying to shut down smaller companies/groups/indiv​iduals who compete with them. There is again a long history with Lexmark using the courts to shut down toner refill companies.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dlee13
Goldmember
Avatar
3,603 posts
Gallery: 479 photos
Likes: 2780
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Jul 09, 2017 19:04 |  #816

This was posted by someone over on FM forums:

"I sent a message to Canon Sweden and just got a reply. I asked them about the dynamic range on the 6D Mk II and they claim that it will be considerably better than the Mk I. He also pointed out that no one outside Canon has got their hands on a camera with final firmware. "


Sony Alpha A7III - Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 - Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro
Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 - Canon EF 16-35mm f4L IS -
Canon EOS M5 - Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 - Canon EF 11-22mm f/4-5.6 STM

Blog (external link) | Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,422 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 341
Joined Sep 2011
Post edited over 1 year ago by FEChariot.
     
Jul 09, 2017 19:31 |  #817

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18398060 (external link)
Terrible analogy.

This line of discussion regarding Magic Lantern has ZERO to do with anything being "broken". Zero.

The Lexmark case that the Supreme Court recently ruled on had ZERO to do with anything being broken. Zero.

Lexmark was able to stifle competition for many years until there was enough support to fight their legal team ... or more specifically, their bankroll of lawyers fees.

The same is true for ML, if Canon ever decided to go after the organizers and developers, who is paying to defend ML? Competition is squashed all the time through threat of a legal battle ... whether there is a legitimate complaint or not. This is nothing new or unique to this situation.

I am with Bassat on this. I think the analogy is good. Once I buy the product it's mine. I don't see Ford going after Hennessy or VW/Audi going after APR for improving their cars. It's a symbiotic relationship.

Besides I don't see this as damaging Canon. In fact I would think having ML available would actually make people want to buy the product over the competition and it actually improve sales.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,276 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2353
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 1 year ago by Wilt. (4 edits in all)
     
Jul 09, 2017 19:42 |  #818

Bassat wrote in post #18398068 (external link)
I must be a complete imbecile. ML writes software. If Canon wants to take them to court, Canon must prove they have standing to do so. Canon must establish at least the possibility that ML has somehow caused Canon damage. ML can do NOTHING to my camera without my permission. I grant ML the access it needs to MY camera. If I were of a mind to, I could write my own software to run a Canon camera. Canon has nothing to say about what I do with MY camera after I buy it. If my putting ML on my camera somehow damages Canon, they would have to come after ME for that, not ML. Great image, Canon suing its customers for using the product they legally purchased. Good business model, too. If Canon had a snowball's chance in hell of even filing a case against ML, it would already have done so. They haven't. Because they know it is a waste of money to even try. Canon has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders to behave responsibly with its money. Frivolous, not-a-chance-in hell legal battles do not come under that umbrella.

Tom, I am not taking a side in this ML vs. Canon hypothetical case, but I'd like so express the different nuances that could be argued in court


  1. Canon: "ML has taken Canon code and altered the behavior of certain modules so as to potential cause harm in the operation of products sold to consumers pre-loaded with Canon firmware."
  2. ML: "ML has not taken Canon code and modified it, but rather has written certain new software modules which replace Canon modules so do analogous but different things than the Canon module it replaces. It is analogous to Dinan inserting its firmware chips in BMW engine controllers to increase power and torque curves, yet do so with zero impact on factory warranties. Just as Dinan alters performance of BMW engine control, ML alleviates some artificially-set standard limitations within the Canon XDx, such as to increase the number of focus points and provide AF-linked spotmetering."



...not to say these are the possible alternatives, but it gives an example (out of many possible) of how the two companies might procede in the prosecution and the defense

You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,614 posts
Likes: 489
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jul 09, 2017 19:45 as a reply to  @ Dlee13's post |  #819

Canon's improved DR first showed up in the 1DX2 and 80D: cameras released 1.5 years ago. Seems people are quick to accept rumors of the 6D2 having a lower DR then any current Canon, and that it must be somehow using an older sensor fabrication. My suspicion is that no matter how much official word about the 6D2 having similar DR as other models, people will still be quick to find validation for internet rumors. It would make sense that the 6D2 would have a better base DR then the 80D, and at least approach the 5D4/1DXII....but no, let's be quick to jump on the internet bandwagon.


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,734 posts
Likes: 2006
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jul 09, 2017 19:51 |  #820

davesrose wrote in post #18398225 (external link)
Canon's improved DR first showed up in the 1DX2 and 80D: cameras released 1.5 years ago. Seems people are quick to accept rumors of the 6D2 having a lower DR then any current Canon, and that it must be somehow using an older sensor fabrication. My suspicion is that no matter how much official word about the 6D2 having similar DR as other models, people will still be quick to find validation for internet rumors. It would make sense that the 6D2 would have a better base DR then the 80D, and at least approach the 5D4/1DXII....but no, let's be quick to jump on the internet bandwagon.

Well, it's not complete speculation. There are several raw files out there from several cameras so there is some basis in fact. It is interesting based on Dlee13's response from Canon Sweden that firmware can greatly affect DR.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 09, 2017 20:02 |  #821

Wilt wrote in post #18398222 (external link)
Tom, I am not taking a side in this ML vs. Canon hypothetical case, but I'd like so express the different nuances that could be argued in court


  1. Canon: "ML has taken Canon code and altered the behavior of certain modules so as to potential cause harm in the operation of products sold to consumers pre-loaded with Canon firmware."

    REPLY:
    That would go over really well. Canon even suggesting it is doing this to "PROTECT" it customers (those who WANT ML) would cause an uproar. They'd have to find at least one ML user who wants Canon to protect them from ML. Yeah, that'll happen.


  2. ML: "ML has not taken Canon code and modified it, but rather has written certain new software modules which replace Canon modules so do analogous but different things than the Canon module it replaces. It is analogous to Dinan inserting its firmware chips in BMW engine controllers to increase power and torque curves, yet do so with zero impact on factory warranties. Just as Dinan alters performance of BMW engine control, ML alleviates some artificially-set standard limitations within the Canon XDx, such as to increase the number of focus points and provide AF-linked spotmetering."

    REPLY:
    If (REALLY BIG ONE) this would go to court, it would be up to Canon to prove they were damaged. ML wouldn't even be asked to provide and excuse for what they've done. If they offered it w/o being asked, they put everything on the table for the prosecution to attack. Again, not likely.



...not to say these are the possible alternatives, but it gives an example (out of many possible) of how the two companies might procede in the prosecution and the defense




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 09, 2017 20:04 |  #822

gjl711 wrote in post #18398230 (external link)
Well, it's not complete speculation. There are several raw files out there from several cameras so there is some basis in fact. It is interesting based on Dlee13's response from Canon Sweden that firmware can greatly affect DR.

One anecdote is proof of nothing. Gottenny evidence?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,614 posts
Likes: 489
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jul 09, 2017 20:06 |  #823

gjl711 wrote in post #18398230 (external link)
Well, it's not complete speculation. There are several raw files out there from several cameras so there is some basis in fact. It is interesting based on Dlee13's response from Canon Sweden that firmware can greatly affect DR.

Is it firmware or an official source that has actual access to the 6D2?


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,276 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2353
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 1 year ago by Wilt. (10 edits in all)
     
Jul 09, 2017 20:09 |  #824

A whole lot of futile speculation and educated (as well as not so educated) GUESSING about what Canon will end up doing to the 6D2 vs. its predecessor, and how the 6d2 will and won't be better/different from products which Canon visualizes as 'higher' in the product family. Having spent a lifetime in product management and planning, and with business school principles of said in my brain, I can say the below chart represents how Canon might conceptualize its family placement...but WHICH individual CHARACTERISTICS that go into the differentiation can vary at different levels, and at different times.

IMAGE: http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i63/wiltonw/Principles/Canon%20family_zpslie3opt9.jpg

So it is possible that

  • 'more pixels' equates to 'better IQ' in Canon's mind for 6D2 vs. 6D, and
  • that 'better DR' might (in Canon's mind)already be in the 6D (vs. 80D and 5DIV) (putting it way ahead in time over its later brothers), so even more DR might not yet make sense
  • they already know now the 6D high DR ate into 5Dn and 1Dn profits with the 6D superior noise that was not equalled until the 5DIV and 80D were launched with their new DR, and know not to repeat that profit erosion again


Similarly,

  • the 7DIII might be improved in noise resistance and in pixel count to be similar to the 6DII, and
  • the smaller sensor of the 7DIII might be viewed as sufficient differentiation to make it 'inferior' in position to the 6DII even with same pixel count and noise qualitiies as the 6DII,
  • Yet the prosumer 7DIII might have better AF than the 6DII, and have 4K video too.



The possibilities are endless, and the subject of endless speculation...we can only wait to see what comes out, and when. And more is pointless and futile argument, ended when Canon makes its launches, and the newer (future) models are rumored and pointlessly (but wishfully) speculated about again.

My chart -- which shows nothing about price nor any of multiple performance axes -- above illustrates principles in product positioning, which might represent the 'ideal' for 2018, and which was inadvertantly violated by marketing positioning errors ("the 'pro feature set' of the 5Dn outweighs DR advantage of the 6D for pros") of 2014-2016 leading to profit erosion for Canon.

You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dlee13
Goldmember
Avatar
3,603 posts
Gallery: 479 photos
Likes: 2780
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Jul 09, 2017 20:15 |  #825

gjl711 wrote in post #18398230 (external link)
Well, it's not complete speculation. There are several raw files out there from several cameras so there is some basis in fact. It is interesting based on Dlee13's response from Canon Sweden that firmware can greatly affect DR.

The conspiracy theoriest in me would like to believe that these bodies that the leaked raw files come from are purposely crippled.

1. As we all know, Canon release test bodies out into the wild a long time before the bodies release. Isn't the point of that for these photographers to test the bodies and give feedback? I seriously doubt the tester would have said nothing if the body made no IQ improvements.

2. People in the thread on the FM forum go into more detail (which I find hard to simplify since I don't have that deeper technical knowledge of how sensors work) and said it is possible for a firmware version to not properly acknowledge the full power of the sensor. I guess if we look at Lightroom as a comparison, it performs poorly no matter what the specs of your build is. This is probably a good example of how a poor firmware/software can effect overall performance no matter the hardware.

3. All these could be very unlikely but until the camera is released it's all speculation. I'm also wondering if Canon would be sick of testers leaking RAW images so the less trusted soruces get the crippled production bodies. These poor leaked images could actually help sales tbh. Good news is always good, but can feel even better when it comes after bad news. If the 6D2 is released with good DR it's what we expect and welcome, but wouldn't celebrate as much. If we expect poor IQ and then after release find out the IQ is much better than initially expected, we will be over the moon.

4. The tests that most people find to be the most accurate (DPR, DXO), are done in controlled environment with controlled lighting.

That's just my wild guesses and I could very likely be 100% wrong but hey, speculation seems to be more fun than actually knowing sometimes :p


Sony Alpha A7III - Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 - Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro
Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 - Canon EF 16-35mm f4L IS -
Canon EOS M5 - Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 - Canon EF 11-22mm f/4-5.6 STM

Blog (external link) | Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

188,440 views & 948 likes for this thread
6d2 is here.
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is phaneendra
1074 guests, 403 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.